Winston Peters - our 6 Weeks PM

Forums › Politics › Winston Peters - our 6 Weeks PM

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7

14851 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2049638 5-Jul-2018 11:27

MikeAqua:

Geektastic:

Rather than means test it per se (which is a poison chalice for politicians) why not make it that you have to actually retire in order to get it - you must be doing less than, say, 15 hours full time work a week or something.

Good idea but how do you account for people with 'passive' income streams.

My plan (universe laughs) is to have bunch of unencumbered assets producing income by the time I retire. I don't expect there to be any state pension for me but if there is I'll take it. Because I've paid what I think is way too much tax most of my life and any chance to get a cent back legally I'll take it.

As the vikings were wont to say, the gods use men to amuse them. Do not announce your plans - they may hear you and decide to interfere just for the fun of it!

Totally agree with you about tax; as for passive income, if you have made provision for yourself then good luck to you. I would ignore it - it gets taxed in any case. However, I suppose the 'fairness' whiners will not like that (since their definition of fairness is usually the illogical equality of outcome) but for me, I would say active work in paid employment (the idea being to force you to leave the work force, opening space for others as well as ensuring a more reasonable basis for paying the pension) defined by the IRD using your tax records.

Fred99

11136 posts

Uber Geek

#2054500 11-Jul-2018 18:44

Winston:

Mr Peters wouldn't comment if Mr Johnson would be a good prime minister, but warned he expected a leadership challenge against Ms May.

"There's every likelihood that there's a spill on," he told Newstalk ZB.

There may be, there may not be. Acting PM should definitely STFU and not be taking sides on UK Politics. He could jeopardise the future relations between NZ and the UK.

In response to China's objection to his previous comments:

"New Zealand is a sovereign nation and whether the United States was telling us to do that or China or any other country, it comes down to our right to see things as we see it in a very responsible way," Acting Prime Minister Winston Peters said on Wedneday.

He said there is "no connection in real terms" to trade, so is not concerned about retaliation in that sphere.

Wrong. There is a connection to trade, agreements are being dishonoured around the world, and again he should STFU. Yes - there's an issue in the South China Sea. No - an acting PM should not "take sides" on that. Do not poke the bear. Hopefully I expect that the Chinese realise that they're dealing with an idiot.

Geektastic

14851 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2063192 26-Jul-2018 21:34

Apparently the Australians have stolen our flag according to Winston. What next?!

Pumpedd

1759 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2063303 27-Jul-2018 08:32

Geektastic: Apparently the Australians have stolen our flag according to Winston. What next?!

The guy has no value at all.

Fred99

11136 posts

Uber Geek

#2063322 27-Jul-2018 09:15

Geektastic: Apparently the Australians have stolen our flag according to Winston. What next?!

That's easy. NZ should hold a $20 million referendum to choose the design for the new Australian flag.

elpenguino

1482 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#2063504 27-Jul-2018 12:04

Saved everyone the trouble.

RogerThat

35 posts

Geek
Inactive user

#2063550 27-Jul-2018 12:13

Geektastic: Apparently the Australians have stolen our flag according to Winston. What next?!

I get where he is coming from. Why should we change ours? Aussie change yours!!!

Go WINSTON!!!

frednz

1434 posts

Uber Geek

#2063624 27-Jul-2018 13:17

When "answering" questions from the Opposition in Parliament, why does Winston Peters have to treat Opposition members in such a smug and high-handed manner? For example, he said to both Simon Bridges and Paula Bennett recently something to the effect that the National Party is about to replace them as Leader and Deputy Leader of the National Party.

I don't know why Speaker Trevor Mallard doesn't step in when such comments are made.

elpenguino

1482 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#2063636 27-Jul-2018 13:44

frednz:

When "answering" questions from the Opposition in Parliament, why does Winston Peters have to treat Opposition members in such a smug and high-handed manner? For example, he said to both Simon Bridges and Paula Bennett recently something to the effect that the National Party is about to replace them as Leader and Deputy Leader of the National Party.

I don't know why Speaker Trevor Mallard doesn't step in when such comments are made.

That's standard petty political parliamentary practice.

Who is your favourite MP? Search hansard and I bet they say/said the same type of things. It's barely a grade above cricket sledging but has the same intention.

frednz

1434 posts

Uber Geek

#2063718 27-Jul-2018 15:48

elpenguino:

frednz:

When "answering" questions from the Opposition in Parliament, why does Winston Peters have to treat Opposition members in such a smug and high-handed manner? For example, he said to both Simon Bridges and Paula Bennett recently something to the effect that the National Party is about to replace them as Leader and Deputy Leader of the National Party.

I don't know why Speaker Trevor Mallard doesn't step in when such comments are made.

That's standard petty political parliamentary practice.

Who is your favourite MP? Search hansard and I bet they say/said the same type of things. It's barely a grade above cricket sledging but has the same intention.

Yes, it's a good idea to search hansard, the comment by Winston Peters on 25 July 2018 saying that the National Party is looking for an alternative leader can be seen here:

https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/hansard-debates/rhr/combined/HansD_20180725_20180725

Hon Simon Bridges: In light of the Prime Minister's comment just then that the bill is a work in progress, and given that it's just come back from select committee, is he acknowledging that it's not fit for purpose and doesn't do what it needs to do?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: What this Government is saying is that unlike the previous Government we have not got a tin ear. We listen and whilst the bill's before this House we will be prepared to make changes if it's warranted, and that party over there looking for an alternative leader can consult amongst themselves.

This may be "standard petty political practice", but I still think the Speaker shouldn't allow "below the belt" blows like this to be made, it puts Parliament in a pretty bad light! To his credit, Simon Bridges didn't respond to this comment.

Geektastic

14851 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2063802 27-Jul-2018 19:11

Given that Winston wasn't returned by an electorate he ought not really to make too many digs about leadership...

Pumpedd

1759 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2063835 27-Jul-2018 20:27

frednz:

When "answering" questions from the Opposition in Parliament, why does Winston Peters have to treat Opposition members in such a smug and high-handed manner? For example, he said to both Simon Bridges and Paula Bennett recently something to the effect that the National Party is about to replace them as Leader and Deputy Leader of the National Party.

I don't know why Speaker Trevor Mallard doesn't step in when such comments are made.

I as well have been perplexed at this. In fact Winston doesnt even answer the questions. I was just saying to a friend today that with Mallard as speaker our democracy seems to be flying out the window.

The key question of the week still answered seems to be what the special deal is with giving millions to some trust in Northland where a few seem to be on NZ First List. Still unanswered as it was a confidential agreement. Pfft.

I dont mind the yelling in question time as thats 3 hours a week that they can do it. But I want legit questions to be answered.

gzt

11677 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2063851 27-Jul-2018 20:51

Which question did he not answer, specifically? It should be easy to find the Hansard on that. I'd like to know.

frednz

1434 posts

Uber Geek

#2064080 28-Jul-2018 13:03

gzt: Which question did he not answer, specifically? It should be easy to find the Hansard on that. I'd like to know.

From Hansard:

Hon Paul Goldsmith: When he said yesterday "the fact that they"—Ngāti Hine—"believe that the transaction suits both their interests and ours is hardly page one news.", how do we know the transaction suits our interests—i.e., the Crown's and taxpayers'—when he refuses to reveal the key details of the deal?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Well, to paraphrase a very famous Australian Prime Minister, Menzies, the first thing we're going to do with Ngāti Hine is put a "g" in it and call it Ngāti Hine—pronounce it properly and ensure that people up there are not offended every time he asks a question. Now, having said that, there is a clear delineation of value to both the owners in the trust and the Government, and that is in a document which, as a commercial document, is confidential.

Hon Paul Goldsmith: Why are the key details of the joint venture—annual rental and net stumpage rate—commercially confidential given that it's public money and the public has a right to know to what extent he is subsidising a private trust?

And:

Hon Paul Goldsmith: How can people have confidence in the probity of his handling of the fund when $6 million has been given to a trust on conditions that he refuses to release, the acting CEO of which was a New Zealand First MP last year and is two spots off entering Parliament again on the New Zealand Party list?

gzt

11677 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2064113 28-Jul-2018 14:18

Thanks for looking that up frednz. I see you have not included the answers Peters made to those questions. He did answer those questions, replying that the details are commercially confidential. Clearly those answers were not satisfactory to you and you chose not to include them.

It's an interesting area. The government does enter into public/private partnership type arrangements from time to time to meet policy objectives and it's a good question what disclosure standards are or should be applied to those. I expect there is already some precedent and Peters is following it. The question/s in full:

Question No. 6—Regional Economic Development
6. Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH (National) to the Minister for Regional Economic Development: Does he stand by all his statements and actions?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Acting Prime Minister) on behalf of the Minister for Regional Economic Development: Yes—on behalf of the Minister.

Hon Paul Goldsmith: When he said yesterday "the fact that they"—Ngāti Hine—"believe that the transaction suits both their interests and ours is hardly page one news.", how do we know the transaction suits our interests—i.e., the Crown's and taxpayers'—when he refuses to reveal the key details of the deal?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Well, to paraphrase a very famous Australian Prime Minister, Menzies, the first thing we're going to do with Ngāti Hine is put a "g" in it and call it Ngāti Hine—pronounce it properly and ensure that people up there are not offended every time he asks a question. Now, having said that, there is a clear delineation of value to both the owners in the trust and the Government, and that is in a document which, as a commercial document, is confidential.

Hon Paul Goldsmith: Why are the key details of the joint venture—annual rental and net stumpage rate—commercially confidential given that it's public money and the public has a right to know to what extent he is subsidising a private trust?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: In the same way that the hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars divvied up in the Callaghan Innovation fund under that Government were in confidential deals—not available to the public—in the very precise, exact way that that Government behaved when they were in power.

Hon Paul Goldsmith: When he said yesterday that Ngāti Hine's acting chief executive officer, the former New Zealand First MP Pita Paraone, was "most certainly within those discussions." about the project, what was the nature of his involvement?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: The reality is that Pita Paraone is someone who was promoted to positions by the former National Government. He is a person of immense respect. His father was one of the last surviving leaders of the Māori Battalion. No one in the North, whatever their politics, thinks that he has been self-interested, other than in serving the people of his tribe or his iwi. This is the first time we've had any questions about the propriety of his involvement. In fact, it's not possible for Māoridom to advance their cause if people of that calibre and experience are denied a chance to make a contribution.

Hon Paul Goldsmith: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. That was all very interesting, but it did not answer the question at all.

Mr SPEAKER: I think it did. Further supplementary?

Hon Paul Goldsmith: I suppose it's worth it.

Hon Paul Goldsmith: Was he aware that Mr Paraone told Radio New Zealand that "I had no part in … signing … the deal, or determining what the deal should be, other than to attend the actual planting of the first tree."; and how does he square that with his comment yesterday that he, the same Mr Paraone, was "most certainly within those discussions." on the project?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Because in the full picture of the developments in Northland, and particularly the intended Waitangi settlement, Mr Pita Paraone has been a very essential personality who's very persuasive, and in that full context, he would have been involved there, and also with respect to Ngāti Hine because he belongs to that iwi. As someone who acted for that iwi myself 40 years ago, I know how long they've been waiting for some help, and it's reflected in the very fine statement in today's Northland papers explaining this: "It certainly is refreshing to have a government that seems to want to actually govern."

Hon Paul Goldsmith: I ask again: what was the nature of Mr Paraone's involvement in the discussions?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: I could tell that member that everybody in Ngāti Hine has been involved in these discussions. It's been a long cause that they have campaigned for, and in that respect, his involvement is no more special than any other member.

Hon Paul Goldsmith: How can people have confidence in the probity of his handling of the fund when $6 million has been given to a trust on conditions that he refuses to release, the acting CEO of which was a New Zealand First MP last year and is two spots off entering Parliament again on the New Zealand Party list?

Mr SPEAKER: I think you mean "New Zealand First".

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Look, the fact is that the number of people seeking to enter Parliament on the New Zealand First Party list is legend, and I can understand why. It's a certain course to a career, and a long career at that. Can I say, secondly—

Hon Members: Richard Prosser!

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Eh?

Hon Members: Denis O'Rourke!

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Oh, so you do have a voice, then? They do have a voice, do they? Can I just say that everybody that's looked at Ngāti Hine, from a long way back, all the way back to the 70s, when Carter Holt Harvey sought to get a 99-year lease and was stopped by a very smart young lawyer at the time so that the properties and the land and forest stayed in Ngāti Hine's control.

Hon Member: Who was it?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Well, modesty prevents me from saying who that lawyer was, but people in Ngāti Hine remember well, and there's nothing untoward in this arrangement whatsoever, other than it begs this question: what has the National Party got against Māori advancement?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7